Intel may cater to Apple with system-on-a-chip, dual-core Atom

Intel's options for Apple and other customers interested in ultra-portable devices are about to expand thanks to the official launch of an all-in-one processor and a dual-core version of its Atom processor.

The semiconductor firm on Thursday revealed the elaborately titled EP80579 Integrated Processor as its first chip to build in every feature of a mobile chipset into one package.

Where the company's earlier technology needs both a discrete processor as well as separate chipsets for video or interfacing with peripherals, the Integrated Processor includes all of this in one component; it's also relatively fast and uses a Pentium M as its main processor with a relatively recent graphics core capable of drawing pixel effects seen in software of recent years.

The component is fast for the system-on-a-chip category, but is more importantly small and a power miser. Compared to a normal system, which would need four chips to achieve the same effect, the Integrated Processor's mainboard takes up about 45 percent less space and is 34 percent more power-efficient, chewing up as little as 11 watts for the entire design.

In contrast to Atom, which in its present incarnation is too large for most small devices, the new chip is expressly meant for the embedded market and runs at very low speeds which peak at 1.2GHz. That can include commercial and industrial applications but is also tailored for very consumer-friendly Mobile Internet Devices that double as portable media players and Internet communicators.

Whether this is immediately useful to Apple is far from a certainty, as the power use is too high for an iPhone-sized device but offers too little performance for its current notebook range. Nonetheless, the breakthrough would also apply to set-top boxes and shares the same processor core as the Apple TV, which uses an under-clocked Pentium M with a basic dedicated graphics chipset that gives just enough performance to play 720p HD video.

However useful this new invention may be, Apple may have an additional choice in very small processors in as little as two months' time.

A new processor model leak suggests Intel will unveil a 1.6GHz, dual-core variant of its Atom processor on September 21st. The processor will likely be too power-hungry for Apple's planned multi-touch tablet — consuming a rumored 8W of power just by itself — but is expected to become the champion of very small budget notebooks with a price tag of just $43 per chip in large batches.

Like the single-core processor already on sale, the dual-core model will use the Hyperthreading technology that first appeared in the Pentium 4 to mirror some of the performance that would normally come from an additional real-world core.

Apple has been shy regarding its own plans, although AppleInsider has exclusively revealed that the Mac maker is likely to become a major supporter of Atom with more than one product scheduled for this year that would be based on the architecture.

Additionally, Intel itself reveals that the two technologies mentioned today will merge as soon as 2009 in Moorestown, a new Atom-based plaform that should be faster and more efficient than the first-generation Integrated Processor and small enough to fit in a smartphone like Apple's iPhone.

Do yourselves a favor and make friends with Intel Engineers. There is nothing about Atom and Apple with the iPhone/iPod or whatever that makes you think will keep Apple from using the IP they gained from PA Semiconductor.

This would be useful for a replacement to the AppleTV. Today's Atom can't come close to the performance of the underclocked Pentium M in the AppleTV. A future Atom would help them build it cheaper and use less power again.

Not suitable for OS X Leopard, since a dual-core Atom doesn't even equal the performance of today's Intel Celeron line up. (which is much slower than the Pentium dual core, which is way slower than a core 2 duo)

For handheld type devices, a PA Semi Cortex-A9 Quad Core system on a chip would offer the full performance of a Core Solo Mac mini with quad cores and 250mW peak consumption for the entire system on a chip!

You are still looking at 8-16x performance per watt gap between future Atoms and currently announced ARM designs...

I don't care as long as Apple does something. I want that tablet. My trusty 12" Powerbook is closing on six years old and is getting slow with current apps, especially since it's limited to only 1.13GB of RAM. But I don't want to buy another laptop. I want something that's easier to use when I'm standing up.

Why does apple have to end up using intel for everything. I just can't understand this obsession. Even when intel does have a chip for the iphone's power envelope, it still probably won't be as good as competing ARM chips. Just because ARM chips basically never make the news doesn't mean they are standing still. Cortex A8 chips will be shipping in phones starting later this year or early next year, and Apple would be foolish not to use them in the next iphone.

Even if Atom ends up being just as good or better than competing ARM chips, it would still not be the right call the go with intel. The biggest advantage ARM has over its competitors is the ecosystem of dozens of fabs making competing and compatible ARM chips. This drives innovation high and prices low. Any price advantage intel might have would almost certainly be part of a loss leading strategy to gain market share and lock manufacturers into x86. Any such initiative would be short-lived and ultimately detrimental to any device will a software ecosystem and a long term road map like the iphone.

That's not to say going with intel was wrong for the mac. On the contrary, it might have been their best move ever. The Core lineup wasn't a bit better than the competition: it was leagues better. And nothing comparable to the ARM ecosystem exists for the PC. Nothing even close. But it would be stupid for Apple to think that what worked for the mac will work for the iphone. Locking yourself into one supplier for your devices most important component is almost never a good choice.

Not suitable for OS X Leopard, since a dual-core Atom doesn't even equal the performance of today's Intel Celeron line up. (which is much slower than the Pentium dual core, which is way slower than a core 2 duo)

Are you kidding? An Atom (or a Celeron, for that matter) has more than enough power for OS X, and for most tasks. Obviously editing video on it would take some patience, but most people never push the limits of their computer's CPU.

Are you kidding? An Atom (or a Celeron, for that matter) has more than enough power for OS X, and for most tasks. Obviously editing video on it would take some patience, but most people never push the limits of their computer's CPU.

I've mentioned this before but IF snow leopard is lighter and faster then Apple could use it on Atom powered devices to go after the entry level buyer. Think Apple versions of net top and net book.

Right now Linux is competing with XP on these types of devices. Needless to say OS X would be a very compelling alternative. Based upon what is know about WIn7 (it'll have the same system requirements as Vista), it'll never make it onto such devices.

It could be a market that Apple could do very well in. While linux is nice it doesn't have the polish of OSX and Xp looks dated to me.

Are you kidding? An Atom (or a Celeron, for that matter) has more than enough power for OS X, and for most tasks. Obviously editing video on it would take some patience, but most people never push the limits of their computer's CPU.

Quite true. I'm running Leopard on my Powerbook, which is the minimum system configuration Apple recommends. I doubt an 867MHz single-core G4 is slower than a dual-core Atom. I'm not sure I'd want to run OS X on a tiny screen like Zunx wants above, though. The 1024x768 screen on the Powerbook is the minimum resolution I'd want when displaying an OS X desktop.

I want to make this abundantly clear. I DO NOT WANT the upcoming Apple tablet/iphone pro multi-touch product to be ANYTHING LIKE all the other pc based mids/netbooks/tablet PCs that came before it.
I want Apple to realize (yet again) what the industry is doing wrong and redefine it for them.
And THAT product I will buy. Just show it to me Steve and you don't even have to show me its functions. It will be an automatic SOLD to me.